Did the Flood really happen?

Thanks.If you put in a bracket, a left-hand bracket anyway, and forget to close with the other bracket, you will lose everything after the left hand bracket. At least down to the end of the paragraph but I've lost whole posts that way. I'll put a bracket hereI kept on writing and it all got erased. But now I see at least that it only erases to the end of the paregraph.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So don't use (square) bracket for text, use ( and ) or { and } instead.The (square) bracket makes the software look for db codes (and the < makes the software look for html codes)I've had the same problem when I forget to properly close a db coded section. ALWAYS use preview and then you can recover by looking at your post text against the posting. This should also become apparent if you use peek or edit on the post.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

If you would actually read the Bible 2 Peter is NOT a source for what is in the Bible Flood Stories. If you want the Bible Flood stories can be found in Genesis 6 and Genesis 7.

Large Igneous provinces such as the Siberian and Deccan Traps are outpourings of 100,000s to millions of cubic km of lava. The total on the Earth is in excess of 100,000,000 c km. Their effect can be imagined by considering the effect of Laki in Iceland 1783, when fire fountains to 1400 m high produced about 18 c km lava over 8 months. The associated gases devastated Iceland and had widespread effects across Europe Asia and Africa with weather changes and famine killing up to 6,000,000. For instance, the Nile flood failed and 1/6 Egypt people died or emigrated.To have all LIPs produced in the last 6000 years would make the Earth uninhabitable, so what would it be like during the Flood year? Noah would not need an Ark, he would need a sealed self-contained survival capsule! And this is without considering all the other volcanoes on Earth.Ignoring RM dating, the Earth can not accommodate its volcanism in 6000 years.The Siberian Traps are associated with the great end-Permian extinction. Comparing the dates of LIPs and major and minor extinctions show that many are associated. At least some LIPs are coincident with continental breakups. It may be that a large continental mass produces some insulation to make the mantle hotter beneath, leading to massive plumes which initiate breakup and release much lava through the fissures produced by the splitting.For volcanophiles, 2 excellent websites are -
- volcanocafe.org which has 3 or 4 easily understood articles a month with several years in their archive
- largeigneousprovinces.org - more technical monthly articles with about 15 years in archive.

Neither does it account for the fact that all oceanic crust is volcanic in origin.

To answer part of Percy's Message 759But YOU are "ignorant" of the fact that THIS Flood was not in the slightest comparable to "floods" of the sort that occur now, that the very least its magniture was millions of such floods combined, but because it was also the rising of the oceans over the land it brought phenomena that couldn't have occurred in a local flood. But this is of course all speculative, because there is no way for us to witness what actually happened in the past. You can't and I can't, and your speculations are based on a false correlation and have no more authority than mine in which I try to envision how this worldwide drowning of the entire earth could have sorted things as we see it did. You say it couldn't but you can't possibly know and your assertions are not at all compelling. Truly I see the establishment explanation as so nonsensical I can't consider it a real threat to the Flood point of view.Summary: I'm certainly not ignorant of it, I reject it. I don't see how I'm ignorant of this or what possible application it has to anything I've said. I'm quite aware that is the establishment point of view so how can I be "ignorant" of it? I have a hypothesis that conflicts with the establishment point of view, which is that the GC is simply the most perfect example of what happened around the world at the same time, and I have in fact described instances that I thlnk represent that idea. So just as I keep saying, the view that I'm "ignorant" is really just a way of objecting to my having a different point of view. Yes this one is hard to prove because so much damage has occurred to the strata in most other places than the Grand Canyon, but it's nevertheless my hypothesis and all you re saying is that you disagree with it and thlnk the establishment view is right. You can offer evidence, but I thlnk your evidence shows something other than you thlnk it shows, which I've argued elsewhere. And so it goes. --OK I will move this over there.Done.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

But YOU are "ignorant" of the fact that THIS Flood was not in the slightest comparable to "floods" of the sort that occur now, that the very least its magniture was millions of such floods combined, but because it was also the rising of the oceans over the land it brought phenomena that couldn't have occurred in a local flood.

---

Of course there is no reason to suppose that Percy is unaware of the proposed magnitude of the Flood. He just does not accept the idea that this would somehow produce the observed order in the fossil record. And he is being entirely sensible in doing so. No matter the magnitude of the Flood it isn’t likely to change the laws of physics. Still less to change them in such a way as to produce the sorting we see. Still less to also explain all the other evidence against your idea.“It was a really incredibly humongous Flood, therefore it could do literally anything” is not even a remotely sensible position. It’s just another daft excuse you made up.

quote:

---

But this is of course all speculative, because there is no way for us to witness what actually happened in the past. You can't and I can't, and your speculations are based on a false correlation and have no more authority than mine in which I try to envision how this worldwide drowning of the entire earth could have sorted things as we see it did.

---

The idea that all ideas about the past are equal is ridiculous. Some ideas are plainly nonsense.

quote:

---

You say it couldn't but you can't possibly know and your assertions are not at all compelling. Truly I see the establishment explanation as so nonsensical I can't consider it a real threat to the Flood point of view.

---

That is because you willfully misunderstand the evidence. Let us not forget some of the nonsense you have made up, such as the idea that depositional environments are uninhabitable wastelands (a truly laughable invention of yours)

quote:

---

Summary: I'm certainly not ignorant of it, I reject it.

---

Let us say that the fact that you reject it as being ridiculous is evidence to the contrary. The fact that you embrace a genuinely ridiculous idea hardly helps your case.So let us note that I was right. My helpful advice did not get through. You repeat the same errors and no doubt you will refuse to accept responsibility for the outcome. Even though the responsibility is all yours.

First, not a fact, it's speculation and fantasy based on mythology.Second, there is zero evidence that

• the character of floods changes with the size of the floods, and
• a single flood happened at one time

and water is still water, gravity is still gravity, physics is still physics.A wind storm is a wind storm and a hurricane is a hurricane, and the amount of damage that occurs in a hurricane vs a wind storm is a matter of degree, not in the kind of damage. A hurricane does not sort debris or make alternating layers. And we have the evidence of what happens from the Black Sea flooding due to rising sea:

quote:

---

The Black Sea deluge is the most well known of three hypothetical flood scenarios proposed for the Late Quaternary history of the Black Sea. It is one of the two of these flood scenarios proposing a rapid, even catastrophic, rise in sea level of the Black Sea occurred during the Late Quaternary.[1][2]

​

In 1997, William Ryan, Walter Pitman and their colleagues first published the Black Sea deluge hypothesis. They proposed that a catastrophic inflow of Mediterranean seawater into the Black Sea freshwater lake occurred at 7,200 BP.[3] Before that date, glacial meltwater had turned the Black and Caspian Seas into vast freshwater lakes draining into the Aegean Sea. As glaciers retreated, some of the rivers emptying into the Black Sea declined in volume and changed course to drain into the North Sea. The levels of the lakes dropped through evaporation, while changes in worldwide hydrology caused overall sea level to rise. The rising Mediterranean finally spilled over a rocky sill at the Bosporus. The event flooded 155,000 km2 (60,000 sq mi) of land and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline to the north and west. According to the researchers, "40 km3 (10 cu mi) of water poured through each day, two hundred times the flow of Niagara Falls. The Bosporus valley roared and surged at full spate for at least three hundred days. They argued that the catastrophic inflow of seawater resulted from an abrupt sea-level jump that accompanied the Laurentide Ice Sheet collapse and the following breaching of a bedrock barrier in the Bosporus strait. As proposed, the Early Holocene Black Sea flood scenario describes events that would have profoundly affected prehistoric settlement in eastern Europe and adjacent parts of Asia and possibly was the basis of oral history concerning Noah’s Flood.[3] ...

---

Again, there is no evidence of any different character for this flood compared to other floods. Just a difference in degree. We don't need to witness prehistoric volcano eruptions to know what they are like: we compare them to modern day eruptions and see what is similar. The same with floods, and with non-catastrophic events like erosion and deposition of sediment in the ocean bottom. ... evidence and comparing evidence in the past to evidence left by modern events and seeing what is similar. That you have not demonstrated. Constantly repeating this assertion does not make it any more valid when you have no evidence of error in the determination of the Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1Our model has the authority of explaining all the known evidence with processes we see occurring today and producing the same results as seen in the geological record, coupled with the scientific validity of dating methods that have been validated again and again.Yours, when you say ... ... shows you are just making stuff up that is not supported by evidence OR the bible. Recognizing that your concept is pure speculation does not mean that other models are speculative. There is no evidence of any mechanism to sort fossils by development of traits, to sort radioactive isotopes by the parent/daughter ratios, or to create multiple layers of alternating sediment densities and type ...... other than time and the same processes we see today. That's your prerogative. Wilful ignorance is always an option for those who want to believe fantasy. Quite simply it demonstrates that you cannot lay down layers of sediment of alternating densities and type from a single flood event no matter how you manipulate your imagination.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : ..Edited by RAZD, : ...Edited by RAZD, : -

If you drop a rock you will hear a sound. If you drop a larger rock, you will hear a louder sound. If you drop a rock millions of times bigger, you will get a much much louder sound.Geologists have seen the results of floods, and from that we have ideas about what would allegedly happen in a flood millions of times bigger. But what you say about how this flood behaved is so completely different (layering sediments, etc.) it's as if you were claiming that the rock millions of times bigger would actually be more quiet than the smaller rock!

Apparently, the less we know about something, the easier it is believe that it happened. This is partly because one may make up whatever one wants.Nothing Faith has presented as evidence (and that is a vanishingly small amount) is diagnostic of a biblical flood. Without the Bible myth as a guide, there would be absolutely no reason to even imagine a global flood only a couple of thousand years ago.

You are amazingly blind to the shakiness of your own "evidence" for the standard interpretation of the geologic column, and to your own denial of the absolute absrdity of it, the tying of time periods of millions of years to a peculiarly discreet collection of dead things buried in a peculiarly straight and flat and often homogeneous sedimentary slab of rock. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Uh huh. OK. If you say so. but I've seen floods too, and I posted a few of them that caused mudslides that buried cars and houses in only one place, and if the same thing is happening next to it on both sides and next to those on both sides and millions of them around the world all at the same time and the rain just keeps coming down and doesn't stop for weeks, bringing down the mud and the rocks and the dead things, and the sea is rising to meet it all and keeps on rising until there's no land visible, that's not just a widdle flood magnified.And imagining the Flood is not something anybody does well, even scientists. They do weird things like impute it to a single layer of the geologic column, they don't seem to have a feeling for the reality of what forty days and nights of steady rain on every square inch of the planet would do, and they had some pretty weird ideas about fossils too. Leonardo did get that much right, but it didn't occur to him that the mountains had to rise with their cargo of shells to make sense out of the facts. And perhaps their rising had smething to do with a tectonic event that caused the sea floors to sink to receive the draining water which he couldn't envision. He was imagining, I'm imagining, all the scientists are imagining, that's all that can be sone with this arena of science. Of course the experts are right and I'm wrong and all the YECs are wrong just because there are more of Them than there are of us and they have training most of us don't have but still Wegener had it right and the rest of them had it wrong. There are lots of events like that in the scientific world. You never know if some visionary idyut is going to come along and change everything.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Actually, I know the geological column pretty well. Why is it absurd?How does this support a global flood?

If you can't see why it's absrd I can't explain it to you.The Flood explains sedimentary layers better.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And how does this create laterally continuous, 'straight and flat' deposits at a continental scale? Yes, we have a hard time imagining things that did not and cannot happen. On the other hand, it allows you to make up whatever you want. What do you mean, and why is it weird? What would it do? Like what? Why was the ocean floor higher than it is now?How does this support a flood scenario?